Again, I have a problem with the expression "blind" till I hear more from
you.
But I think the important piece of information the client gets from the
Redirect-Ref header is that the resource understands the
Apply-To-Redirect-Ref header. So that's why it makes sense to return
Redirect-Ref header with the 302, but not with a response to a request that
was already using Apply-To-Redirect-Ref. So perhaps you would be happier if
we just say this.
--Judy
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaron Goland [mailto:yarong@Exchange.Microsoft.com]
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 2:50 AM
To: 'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'
Subject: Yaron.Redirect.BlindRedirect
The second sentence of the last paragraph of section 6.3 reads: "The
Redirect-Ref header informs a reference-aware client that this is not an
ordinary HTTP 1.1 redirect, but is a redirect reference resource. "
If the purpose of the Redirect-Ref header was solely to inform the client
that they were dealing with a redirect resource then the header would be
returned on all responses from a redirect resource, even those with a
Apply-To-Redirect-Ref header.
However the purpose of the Redirect-Ref header is to let redirect aware
clients determine that they are dealing with a blindly generated 302. As
such I move that the sentence be changed to state: "The Redirect-Ref header
informs a redirect aware client that they have received a blind 302 response
from a redirect resource."
Similarly the main paragraph of section 11.1 currently reads: "The
Redirect-Ref header is used in all 302 responses from redirect resources.
Its presence informs reference-aware clients that the response is not a
plain HTTP/1.1 redirect, but is a response from a redirect reference
resource."
I move that it be re-written to read: "The Redirect-Ref header is used to
mark blind 302 responses from redirect resources."